Lance Armstrong finally to come clean?

I just read a news release announcing that Lance has agreed to an exclusive interview with Oprah Winfrey to discuss his use of drugs. This is scheduled to air 1-17-13. I think he is going to fess up. What do you think?

From what I've heard/seen he's been working on a deal with USADA on confessing. USADA obviously promised him something in return for the public confession. Whether he get's his Tour titles back or can compete in triathalons remains to be seen.

If he totally comes clean, future generations will read cycling anthologies full of stories about Merkx and his attacks, Hinnault and his tenacity, Moser and the hour record and LA's confession on Oprah, lol....

There have been several analysis' of the affect this would have since the story was first floated last week. The consensus seems to be that Lance would open himself to less than 20 million in paybacks and costs (so all in, and maybe as lil as 10) but no jail time (and maybe no criminal charges) as the SOL has run on almost everything. These aren't my conclusions, so I can't vouch for any of it. To me, the more interesting question is what will this do to his legacy/brand.

And of course he might just hold fast with the 'no, no, no it wasn't me' story.

From what I've heard/seen he's been working on a deal with USADA on confessing. USADA obviously promised him something in return for the public confession. Whether he get's his Tour titles back or can compete in triathalons remains to be seen.

I've never seen LA as that pragmatic. He seems more like a blood thirsty wolf than a wily old fox. He may be mellowing, or I have my head up my arse.

Clean eh? The only way that man could ever be clean inside is if he started drinking bleach.

I'm expecting a big sob story about victimisation and character assassination with little old Lance as the victim.
He knows that if he admits to anything he will have a couple dozen people calling lawyers to give instructions briefly described as nail that f##ker to the wall.

And I surmise that Oprah will pay every penny of it for the exclusive. And why not. Her empire is worth billions. Even more incentive for Lance if he can save not being legally convicted, can save at least one or two of his titles and eventually be allowed to compete again.

Originally Posted by Fiskare

There have been several analysis' of the affect this would have since the story was first floated last week. The consensus seems to be that Lance would open himself to less than 20 million in paybacks and costs (so all in, and maybe as lil as 10) but no jail time (and maybe no criminal charges) as the SOL has run on almost everything. These aren't my conclusions, so I can't vouch for any of it. To me, the more interesting question is what will this do to his legacy/brand.

And of course he might just hold fast with the 'no, no, no it wasn't me' story.

Even before all the drug crap came out. I always regarded Greg LeMond as America's greatest cyclist. Armstrong was good but much of his success (not including the drugs) was due to the teams that surrounded him. LeMond likely could have won 5 or maybe even 6 tours if he didn't have Bernard Hilnault for a team mate then suffer a collapsed lung from a hunting accident.

Coming "clean" would be Armstrong just telling the truth for its own sake. Fess up, period. What this is Armstrong trying to finagle something for himself. He regards the truth as something to denied, revealed or twisted to his own advantage.

Just remember that there is not too much difference between the worst of us and the best of us.
Did the "old time" cyclists cheat?? Probably so. Who knows how the others would have fared with our 24 hour news "cycle"??
As far as the others who turned evidence against Armstrong, in my opinion they are no better than him. They all cheated and took away opportunities from those who even though talented, refused to cheat and would not even get a chance to compete.
Really it matters little what he has to say. The evidence against him is out there and damaging. I admit to enjoying his run over the years. A story that good generally has it's dark side.
Our society is set up to adore or crucify with little in between. There isn't much in life that money hasn't screwed up.

Just remember that there is not too much difference between the worst of us and the best of us.
Did the "old time" cyclists cheat?? Probably so. Who knows how the others would have fared with our 24 hour news "cycle"??
As far as the others who turned evidence against Armstrong, in my opinion they are no better than him. They all cheated and took away opportunities from those who even though talented, refused to cheat and would not even get a chance to compete.
Really it matters little what he has to say. The evidence against him is out there and damaging. I admit to enjoying his run over the years. A story that good generally has it's dark side.
Our society is set up to adore or crucify with little in between. There isn't much in life that money hasn't screwed up.

I agree, and don't mean to crucify him. There is greatness in what he did, and great deceit as well. The giant has feet of clay. But sadly, it seems he cheated on a grand scale for many years, and now that he's been outed, still regards the truth with contempt.

Just remember that there is not too much difference between the worst of us and the best of us.
Did the "old time" cyclists cheat?? Probably so. Who knows how the others would have fared with our 24 hour news "cycle"??
As far as the others who turned evidence against Armstrong, in my opinion they are no better than him. They all cheated and took away opportunities from those who even though talented, refused to cheat and would not even get a chance to compete.
Really it matters little what he has to say. The evidence against him is out there and damaging. I admit to enjoying his run over the years. A story that good generally has it's dark side.
Our society is set up to adore or crucify with little in between. There isn't much in life that money hasn't screwed up.

this is my body and i can do whatever i want to it... This ad was made at the height of his drug cheating...

oh he was tweakin' it. ppl need to stop caring about pro athletes. who gives a rats ass if they cheat, maybe thats why he had a nut chopped off. my nuts would want to abandon ship too, if i was spinning for 6 hrs a day and spiking **** into my body. go out and have fun and when it stops being fun then find something else. i'm so sick of hearing about oprah and lance i might chop my nuts off

And that's a shame. I'd rather see what men can do than what drugs can do. Even if that is a lot slower.

Sure, we all would.
I mean lets face it, even the TDF on dope isn't "exciting" to watch.
As far as excitement goes, the few more minutes it would take wouldn't make a difference.

Does the fact that everyone doped at that level make it "ok"?
No

However, the fact that everyone at that level doped made it necessary to win.

I would bet money that lance not doping would have beaten every non doper.
Lance not doping probably would have also beaten several of the dopers.

So, what do you do if you busted your ass your whole life to win only to find out you won't win and nobody will know who you are because all the top people are doping.
It is easy for all of us to say we will fight the good fight and not sully the results because we are not in that position. However, I would bet the majority of us that say we would never do what Lance did would do exactly what Lance did if presented the opportunity.

If Lance would not have doped up, nobody would know his name at all.
Instead the name of the next doper would be on our tongues.

BTW, just out of curiosity who here could name the 2nd place winner of every year from 1999 to 2005? Unless you are seriously in to watching cycling I bet most people couldn't name the five 2nd place guys. I would even bet the majority of people could not name the guy that got 2nd place 3x's in those years even though he doped too.
Yet, Lance Armstrongs name would still be the first to come to mind of the majority of people in the world when it comes to cycling.

Sure, we all would.
I mean lets face it, even the TDF on dope isn't "exciting" to watch.
As far as excitement goes, the few more minutes it would take wouldn't make a difference.

Does the fact that everyone doped at that level make it "ok"?
No

However, the fact that everyone at that level doped made it necessary to win.

I would bet money that lance not doping would have beaten every non doper.
Lance not doping probably would have also beaten several of the dopers.

So, what do you do if you busted your ass your whole life to win only to find out you won't win and nobody will know who you are because all the top people are doping.
It is easy for all of us to say we will fight the good fight and not sully the results because we are not in that position. However, I would bet the majority of us that say we would never do what Lance did would do exactly what Lance did if presented the opportunity.

If Lance would not have doped up, nobody would know his name at all.
Instead the name of the next doper would be on our tongues.

BTW, just out of curiosity who here could name the 2nd place winner of every year from 1999 to 2005? Unless you are seriously in to watching cycling I bet most people couldn't name the five 2nd place guys. I would even bet the majority of people could not name the guy that got 2nd place 3x's in those years even though he doped too.
Yet, Lance Armstrongs name would still be the first to come to mind of the majority of people in the world when it comes to cycling.

nuff said

he wouldnt have beaten Cadel Evens, ''id bet money had lance had not doped he would have beaten every other non doper''